mainstream page would be like angelina jolie embracing u.s. rescues. it would be like who would have thought. but that is what happened. on behalf of everybody at p and pwn and all the folks here at lizner, thank you so much for

coming. we at p and p have been working with lizne-r awe tore yum putting -- auditorium putting on large author events. we're glad to have such a space schuss facility here in downtown washington and what terrific crowd this evening. i have to marvel at the size of this audience and what it says about dan rather's continued popularity. for those of us of a certain generation who grew up watching dan report the news on cbs for 44 years i can appreciate his appeal and the indelible mark that he's left on our consciousness but i see a lot of younger faces out there this evening and you all are a testament to dan's amazing ability still to connect with and communicate to people of all

ages. dan himself has expressed surprise at the significant impact he's had in recent months especially via social media. his identity had been so tied up with cbs over so many years that when he left the network just over a decade ago amid some controversy he wasn't sure what ed do next but dan has always had a passion for reporting and he has kept at it, passed his 86th birthday which he celebrated lasthi week. [applause] he has said before may hear him say again this evening he feels quite e humbled and grateful for many people who follow his facebook platform, news and guts. [applause] which is, is named after his

production company. it's where he offers updates on current events and reflects on an array of issues. a few months ago "politico" reported that news and guts gettingic on average more likes, comments and shares per post than buzzfeed, "usa today" or cnn. [applause] dan's new book, quote what uniteste us," which he coawed thored with elliot kirschner. it is a collection of essays. the chapters sound pretty basic with such headings as the press, empathy, the environment, and public education but dan personalizes many topics wrapping in anecdotes from his storied life, reflecting on the qualities and trend making our country what it is today and offering thoughts what should be done to deal with current

challenges. dan is outspokenly patriotic but he made no secret about his deep sense of alarm, about trump, about shattering of important norms of american life, about entrenched partisanship growing inequalityty and persistent injustice. i remains optimistic believing in the fundamental integrity and honesty of americans. he bring as seasoned perspective and sense of balance and reason to a public discussion that now a-days is all too often dominated byub politically-motivated distortions and just plain untruths. dan will be in conversation here this evening with jonathan capehart, i who's a member of "the washington post"'s editorial board. he has been there for a decade now and he has also msnbc contributor. so ladies and gentlemen, please join me welcoming dan rather and

jonathan capehart. [applause] >> thank you. i'm going to add a little bit more the bio that brad gave. i'm sure everyone knows who dan rather iss but as journalist tht i feeled need to say this, dan rather is journalist as journalist. he worked at cbs news for 44 years. 24 of those years you were beamed into our homes as anchor of the "cbs evening news.." after your departure from the tiffany network in 2005 you kept

working. r still working as brad talked about, as all of you know news and guts, the company, news and gutss facebook page, your own personal facebook page. and now you're latest book, what unites us, reflections on patriotism. that ask what brings us here tonight. so on behalf of myself, on behalf of journalists my age and maybe a little younger who have looked to you as a guidepost, welcome to washington, welcome to george washington university. >> thank you very much, jonathan. thank you. [applause] thank you. >> so, i mean, dan, and i can call you dan, right? >> please. >> your birthday was halloween. you turned 86. i got two questions. have you ever considered

retiring? i mean your have earned it. >> no. [laughter]. no, jonathan, it's a fair question. but i like toqu work. i'm the son of two very hard-working parents. i really liked to work, and i loved this work, which is to say i had a passion for reporting news. as long as i have my health, god's grace and somebody will listen, read or watch, then i really do like to work. >> speaking of people who like to listen, read and watch, the other thing that is so fascinating is that you are wildly popular and wildly popular with millenials. i mean why do you think that is? >> well the honest answer is, jonathan, i don't know. i'm amazed. [laughter] i say this humbly, not a word

generally present or past anchormen from television, but nonetheless, that i'm amazed by it. i don't understand it. as best i can make out that when we started the facebook page with my coauthor elliot kirschner, the goal was to give some context and perspective to the news and when possible when i felt i had any experience or knowledge to put things into historical context. so my guess is that in the havoc of the daily headlines that some people, and i have no illusions, we have a large audience, but it is not the largest audience in social media, that some people are looking for a steady, what they consider to be a reliable and experienced voice and partly pause, let's face it, i've been around a few years, and i have been a lot of miles as a reporter, that is the best i can

do guessing what the attraction is. >> so when it comes to writing a book and releasing a book it's not that you wake up on monday and by friday the book is out. >> no. >> this book took some planning, but it seems as though your timing could not have been more impeccablee. so i'm wondering when did the idea of this book occur to you? was it pretrump getting into the race, or post-trump getting into the race? >> it was pretty much around the timet when president trump got elected that we had been thinking about thehe book. i had no idea that we could have the book out frankly this soon in 2017. but the people that published the book approached me and said, listen, we've been reading your facebook o pieces. would you consider doing a book?

and i said, well, certainly i would but could we get it out in 2017? somewhat to my surprise, they said,7t yes, we can do it in 20. but the answer to your question, at or about the time president trump got elected was when the early seed of the book. >> one of the things that i love about reading your book, and i have my own copyright here. >> bless you. >> books to me are living documents. i write in them. i underline them. i write notes and the thing that i love about your book is from beginning to end how much it reminded me of who we were, we, as ae nation, who we were, and who we are and i finished reading the book before wednesday night so, it was wonderful to read something from someone that is as venerable as you, reminding me that the

despite the situation that we're in now, that we can get through this and so, this is one of the reasons why i was wondering why you wrote this book? was this to be in a way a salve for a hurting nation, or was it meant to be, something where people can go back and in terms of history, be reminded of who we are at a time when we're questioning who we are? >> well, if you will permit me, i've been thinking something about that. making this book tour, sort of desperate effort to sell the book -- [laughter] i'mse appearing at various plac, this is a very common question. so with your permission and only with your permission, i would like to read something i anticipated the question. >> make this democracy.

should dan read what he wants to read? [applause] of course. >> one, i was, you know, as we have entered a very complicated and anxious time during this past year, i have been in reflective state. those who know me well might say that reflective state is rare for m me, but i've been in a reflectivee state. thinking back i over my life and career, i think about all the change and uncertainties that i witnessed as a child of the great depression and world war ii. seeing the fever of the red scare, the fight for civil rights, vietnam, watergate, 9/11, and our current moment of history, and as i have been thinking about what it means to be an american, what it means to be a patriot in the second decade of the 21st century, that really was the beginning of

the idea for the book was, what is patriotism in our time? and i know a lot of people confuse patriotism with nationalism. one of the discussions in what unites us is how important it is to recognize the difference between patriotism and nationalism. but those things were in my head. so i wanted to do a book that contributes to people's thinking about whatri patriotism is. i'm not an expert on patriotism but as much as anything the effort in the book is to start a conversation about patriotism, what it is in this time. and to make sure that people do understand that by dictionary definition there is a difference between patriotism and nationalism. patriot system of course a deep love of country but one key of patriotism and being a patriot

is humility. if you're a true patriot you don't takee the view you go around beating on your chest saying we're better than everybody else. we're the best, we're the strongest at the time, that you're humble enough to know we're in search of the more perfect union. inn the very beginning our founding fathers in the constitution said in order to seekio a more perfect union. so that's patriotism. nationalism carries inherent in it a certain amount of arrogance and conceit and the dankwer nationalism carried to extremes, you have, you can have extreme nationalism and also racial nationalism, as in aryan nationalism. we know one of the things i wanted to do with "what unites us," remind people of the historical perspective that follows. extreme economic nationalism, in

the 1920s led to the great depression. aryan nationalism, racial nationalism led us to adolf hitler. i'm not suggesting we're at this point. i'm suggesting with the authoritarian nature of the present presidency, sometimes it is only a short distance to extreme nationalism which can lead tosh nativism, that leads o tribalism. and in our great historical, never before in the history of mankind experiment that is the united states that tribalism, if we ever descend into tribalism, then we're through as the land of the free and the home of the brave. >> in your chapter entitled, steady, and for those of you with the book, i'm going to read from page 249 and 259, because you have this analogy of a pendulum, this fits in with what

you're speaking about 249, you have had your rheumatic fever and you've been listening to edward r. murrow on the radio and the war, you're listening to him reporting from london, and you write, i have witnessed the great pendulum of personal and national fortune swing in the right direction and i was armed with the lesson of my father, highmy hero, murrow, and my country, stay steady. and then, 10 pages later you write, the pendulum of your great nationn is now and present day. the present pendulum seems to have swung towards conceit and unsteadiness once again. our government is there to serve us,me not the other way around. and when i read that, it was just after the results on tuesday, virginia, and new jersey, and the minneapolis city council races --

[applause] and the mayor's race in montana and charlotte. wondering what do those results, what do those results tell you in terms of that pendulum swing? is what happened on tuesday the beginning of the pendulum starting to swing back from what you wrote of our great nation swinging toward con seat of and unsteadiness once again? >> i think there are indication that is it is the pendulum swinging back. the metaphor i sometimes uses as ebb and flow to american politics, that sometimes we to, we lurch in one direction to the you want to call it that. other times we lurch to the right, during the red scare time. but inevitably over our history, that ebb and flow steadies itself more other less in the broad middle. and i do think by any reasonable

analysis, a reading of results of tuesday gives an indication that thesu country having swung very far to the right is in the process of swinging a bit more toward the middle. you and i know from having covered politics a long time overnight is a long time in politics. a week is forever. and now suddenly people are talking about, well maybe a democratic groundswell for 2018. i think it is early, too early to say that. i would tell you quite honestly personally, i think that some democrats are celebrating a little too early. they are doing their equivalent of moonwalking in the end zone. >> you're right. >> too early for that. in answer to your question, i this that the results not themselves, but the margin by which swung, within that most importantly, the difference of

the vote this time in the suburbs, not just in the country, suburbs were key to trump's victory are swinging other way. i think there are early indications that pendulum may be swinging back the other way. things toin watch. a very serious war overseas could change things, could change the public mood very quickly. and most people in the end vote their pocketbooks. >> right. todd: -- >> if the economy continues to boom,om continues to do quite well, that will gravitate to trump's advantage. if the economy cools off or starts going the other way, that would be to his disadvantage. but, you know, one of the things that i hope people will take from, what unites us is that yen overall ted steadiness of the

american people is one of our strength. we have weaknesses. we have vulnerabilities. we're far from perfect but overall in the main, any study of our history shows you that we may go through a period of great division during the 1960s with the war, race riots in some our major cities. we were certainly divided in the disasterous civil war but we got through and steadied ourselves. the spirit of this book is a hope that we can remember that, and if it needs to be said, i'm an optimist by nature and by experience. i'm absolutely convinced while this is a very anxious time, in many way as perilous time for the country, we're going to get through this it may be a long, dark valley, but we'll get through it and come out the other o indand medium, better o, i'm absolutely convinced of it.

[applause] >> bring you back to patriotism in that, for those of you following along page 12, what is patriotism, this line that you wrote made me think of another controversy that we have been dealing with. and you write, i see my love of country imbued with the responsibility to bear witness to its faults. and when i read that line i was instantly brought to the football players in the nfl who are taking a knee, the young protesters around the country who have taken to the streets in the black lives matter movement. the women who flooded the streets of america on january 21st, the day after trump's inauguration to protest his incoming policies. the people who took to the streets the week after that when he proposed muslim ban. >> right. >> and, when it comes to the nfl

protests, you have the president tweeting, speechafying saying those people doing that bearing witness to our nation's faults, are un-american. they don't love the flag. they don't love the anthem. what do you, what do you make of that? talk about that. >> i will talk about it with a short preface. i stand for the national anthem and without apology i stand with my hand over the heart and i generally at least mouth the words and sometimes actually sing the words. thatov is what is within me. that is what i feel when i hear the national anthem. having. said that, i respect greatly those who have had different experiences, whose conscience dictates a different course, and they have every right to dissent. in fact dissent which i talk about what unites us, dissent

over the long core has been one of our strengths in the country. because time and again -- [applause] time and again dissenters have, in the beginning they're called unpatriotic. they're called against the military, against the flag, what have you, but over time, they, when justice is on their side, people come around and say, you know what? the radical of yesterday was the prophet of tomorrow. we've seen this time and again. maybe, one example i would use, with women's suffrage. those women who spoke out seeking the vote for women in the 19th century, if you read what was said about them at the time. radical, they were unpatriotic. they were tryingun to undermine

the culture and society. what took a while, it took too long but by the time, we were 1/5 finished with the 20th century, we finally, finally had women vote. that is one example. the civil rights movement led by reverend dr. martin luther king in the early '60s. dr. king was accused of being a communist. he was seen as an extreme radical. those were among the milder things, however, by continuing to stand strong for non-violent protests in the face of injustice, we wound up by the midd 1960s, passing some of the most important domestic legislation in the country. the point being we should be very cautious of criticizing dissent. conscionable dissent is patriotic and the president, and, i'm trying to be as respectful of the office of the presidency i can you about this

effort to shift the public perception of these dissenters as unpatriotic and against the military and against the flag is frankly unconscionable and, that is what is unpatriotic. it has to be. [applause] >> in fact, you write, on page 35, dissent is doubly necessary to resist the slide into greater autocracy. you said something just a second ago about your respect, your respect for the office, was holding you back from going full bore. so i will to maybe halfway into full bore. [laughter] toto me, as an american, and certainly as an african-american , watching the president of the united states on a tuesday in august in the

lobby of his tower on fifth avenue give moral equivalence, make a moral equivalence sy between the nazis, white supremacists, and the bigots marching on charlottesville with the people who came out to counter protest was a bridge too far for me. >> itt was for me as well. >> that i thought that in that one action, donald trump ceded the moral authority of the presidency by doing that. am i, am i going too far? >> no. no, definitely, not. [applause] this is exactly why in in "what unite us," reflections on

patriotism, and i didn't want to make it a screed on trump administration. mentioneds not anywhere in the book. >> not at all. a broader discussion, to put in the two words, to give some context and perspective to what is goingrs on in the natiol leadership. that, this was unconscionable, what the president did. in making this moral equivalency, and sending the proverbial dog whistles and winks, winks to the likes of ku klux klan and neo-nazis. my hope for the book, i hope, many of the people who still support president trump will read the book, not because i'm trying to convince them that they're wrong about some of trump's policies, but to understand, which iso think allf us need to understand, this is not normal. this is unique to this presidency that has happened here. [applause] i will give you a specific

example. here's, historical context. i want to take you back to sometime in the early '70s. some neo-nazis paraded in skokie, illinois. you can go back read in the archives, theyey paraded -- at that time the president was richard nixon during the t time. it was unthinkable that the president would say anything that tried to make some moral equivalency with them. and that was in the early '70s and presidency of richard nixon. richard nixon wouldn't touch it. it was just unthinkable, that a president would have anything that could be read by, from any viewpoint, giving approval, or giving moral equivalency to those neo-nazis, deep anti-semites in skokie. now we go forward to 2018, to 2017 to the present year, and this, this is why we have to

recognize as a people, whether we're republican, democrat, independent, mugwump, whatever we are, to send a very strong signal that with the president of the united states who is, remember, he is not just head of government, but under our system, he is also head of state. by the way this is going back to my saying to i have great respect forve the office of the presidency. i was we've white house correspondent for cbs news for 10 years. i don't want to sound sophomoric but i felt a great sense of pride and responsibility every morning i walked into those gates, thinking about our history, thinking about what the office of the presidency is. sometimes our foreign friend don't understand. sometimes we don't understand ourselves, that we have a form of government where the president represents, he is head of state, with all of that conveys, as well as head of

government. so when i i say i respect the office, but you never met anybody thatt felt stronger, that, that the presidency because it is combined head of state and head of government, has the heaviest responsibility of any leader in the world, not because of his strength and the ability to start an atomic war but what the ideal that it represents. and, that, fortunately we as americans, we never have thought, a majority of us don't think now, and i'm convinced don't think in the future, we don't view our president as some descendent of a sun god, or some king. he is another citizen, who has been elevated to the highest honor we have, an that carries with it a tremendous responsibility and the criticism of president trump which i think is most valid is that the tone he has brought to the presidency.

there is nothing noble in what he is doing. people want a president to have at least some semblance of nobility because we would like to think of ourselves as a noble people on a noble experiment, to prove that a multireligious, multiracial, multiethic society can hold itself together. so this is why it is so important to recognize that this is a unique period, when people say, well, we had presidents, we don't like, that is true but we never had a president so personally, directly, unrelently, attacked individual reporters, reporters at large, saying they are quote enemies of the people. i suggest to you this is a very dangerous phrase to use, that the press, are enemies of the people. he has attacked institutions of the press and threatened institutions of the press. we had never anything like it. when people say, well, remember

president nixon. the nixon administration, president nixon didn't like the press at all, and he did make efforts to intimidate the press, including individual reporters, yes, including this individual reporter but by and large he used surrogates. for example, his vice president, spiro agnew was his hitman on racial policy the president himself very rarely, i can't remember a single time when he personally attacked individual reporters, or when he personally attacked some institution, he might complain but not attack it. and this iske key. the reasonla that it is is key,i hear people say all the time, naturally, dan rather, you would complain about the president complaining about the president. no, with these kind of attacks, of course it is important to our reputations and you can say our living as journalists but it is vital to the country we understand this has to be unacceptable because a free, a

truly-free and independent, fiercely-independent press are necessary iss the red beating heart of freedom and democracy. if we don't have it, we will not have the system of government we have now. [applause] >> so, given what you just said, you said a lot of things, i put the press piece off to the side, and what you were talking about, before like, we've never seen this, before much, the tone and tenor coming out of the oval office, coming out of the mouths and twitter fingers of the president of the united states. we have been, well, people have been lauding republican members of congress like senator corker, senator flake, senator mccain, who have stepped out and spoken

very bluntly about the president. two of them are retiring, and one is facing his own mortality. but tick mass me wonder about what responsibility republicans have to emulate what corker, flake, and mccain are doing? i thought of this when i read this line in the patriotism chapter, where you asked the question, do you stay and try to change the church from within, or leave the church? what would you advise republicans to do? >> well, first of all, i wouldn't, i would not place myself in position as advising anybody. that i made so many mistakes, have so many wounds i wouldn't do it. however i take your question and it is a serious question. but this is a question of conscience, especially for republicans because they are in the majority, and the president

is a member of their party. there has been, and i haven't heard this word used much, but, again, let's talk directly, there has been some cowardice in the republican party. [applause] it is a harsh word, and i understand that, cowardice comes from any number of republicans saying to themselves, i hate what the president is saying. i hate the tone and tenor of what he is saying. i hatet the impression he has left of his, about his style of leadership, but, they haven't broken out to say so. as you rightly point out, one thing for retiring senators to say it. it is another for another senator facing his mortality to say it, but takes, it takes courage. it takes guts to say what your conscience tells you and to do the right thing. i will say this, that democrats

sometimes when they have been in the majority have faced, if not identical, at least similar questions. right now the republicans are in the majority, that history is going to judge very harshly if those republicans, who continue to by theirre silence acquiescen the tone and t tenor of this presidency, i don't consider that a partisan political statement. i don't intend it to be. that i don't want to get an argument about ideology. we're talking about our country, folks. we're talking about what kind of country we areg becoming. and because they're in the majority, the republicans have the heaviest responsibility to speak out when their conscience whispers to them that they should. thus far very few have done so. >> you know, i was going to move on to another part, but, you have a chapter empathy, and,

there are a couple of lines here, again, like you say, you don't talk about president trump at all. you don't mention his name. his name is not in the book, but, in the empathy chapter on page 101, you write, i worry our nation suffers from a deficit empathy. this is true in many of people of positions of national leadership. two pages later, you right, one often finds the greatest lack of empathy in those who were born lucky. >> well i think it is very clear who i'm talking about. [laughter] >> like really clear. >> i don't read, i'm not trying to be clever about this but again, you know, i'm trying to elevate the level of discussion. part of the spirit of what unites us is to say we need to

be much more civil in our discussions. one can argue perhaps i events been as civil on this stage tonight as i should have been but, we all know what is happening. by the way the empathy chapter may be my own favorite chapter in the book because we are as americans, again emphasizing, we have our faults, we're not perfect but one of the things we've had through our history, it is a mark of the american character to be empathetic. and we've seen marvelous, really wonderful demonstrations of it recently in the wake of the great hurricanes, particularly one harvey in houston. whatf we saw is, immediately, regardless of race, religion, ethnicity, neighbor helping neighbor, people pitching in, not waiting for the county or federal government to come pitch and help. a demonstration of empathy, that stands as an example. we are empathetic people.

what has happened very recently, and i will say has been building for some years, is the idea somehow that compassion is enough. here again, i refer to the dictionary. there is difference between compassion and empathy. compassion is i feel sorry for people. empathy is saying in a effect, it is not feel sorry for people. i understand, and i'm trying hard to understand what they're going through, there but for the grace of god go i. that is empathy. it is a hallmark of our history, a hallmark of our character. there has been an attempt to sort of squeeze it out of our national character but it isn't going to work. >> you know, you tell a story about, when you were growing up and the families that all lived around one family that lived in basically a hut, and at one

point you said to your mother, something to the effect that you, you felt sorry for, for the neighbors and your mother snapped at you. what did she say to you? >> what she said was a version of what i said earlier. no, we don't feel sorry for them. we understand. we understand what they're going through and we try to help them. >> i want to bring, i know i put the press portion of your previous answers to the side. i want to bring it back, because a free press, free and unfettered press, the one leg of the stool of our democracy but you have an entire chapter devoted to books. for you, books is maybe the second and third leg of that stool because of what books represent. and i know you want to, you want to talk about that part.

you want to read a part. >> thank you for asking. [laughter] but, you know, i love books. i was very lucky. i was introduced to books early and introduced to the houston heights library when i was six, no more than seven years old and it was one of the transforming events of my life but, again, we tendma to overlook how important books have been in our history. and in this chapter i will read, i hope i read a little better this time, but this is from page 145. if you travel to washington, d.c., you can see our country's debt to the power of books in the veryto heart of our federal city. next to the supreme court and facing the great dome of the capitol is the library of congress. i find the symbolism inspiring.

three institutions that write, judge, and archive the words and thoughts that will now allow our nation to function. the library of congress was founded in 1800 with a modest mission, a reference resource for congress but that changed after the british burned washington during the war of 1812 and the original collection was t lost. inal response, thomas jefferson offered to sell his own library to the u.s. government. his collection of books was considered one of the finest in the news world, containing thousands of volumes on almost every topic imaginable, not just law, statecraft and history but also the sciences, philosophy and the arts. to those who argued that such a desperate set of works was

unnecessary for a library congress, jefferson responded, quote, there is in fact no subject to which a member of congress may i not have occasion to refer. i go on to write, as part of this chapter, you know, growing up up in working class houston, i never heard of the library of congress or the great rotunda of the university of virginia, but my local public branch of the houston public library showed me bookwere not justmp important bt objects of beauty. the stone beauty and high ceilings, big windows, and a red tile roof. the italian-style architecture, made the library seem world's away from my hard scrabble neighborhood. i was pleased it later became a recognized historical landmark. even as a high school student, i would often prolong my walk home

from school to go to the library. it may sound sappy, but the building inspired me to dream of exploring a world greater than the world i knew. [applause] >> don't put it away yet. don't put it away yet. because, you, you, in, that wasn't even my favorite part of this chapter. i was going to read it myself but you need to read it because, out loud, i mean. [applause] >> because the words that you say in the last paragraph of the book's chapter, page 153. >> right, right. taking a second to get tonight is so stirring. while he is finding the page like i said -- >> 153? >> i underlined in my book. this is so, this is some great, great language here. please read that last paragraph.

>> the last paragraph on page 153? [laughter]. thank you. >> this is good, folks. >> our nation was born in a spirit of fierce debate. our founding fathers had sharp political differences but they were almost all deep-readers, writers and thinkers. when they said about creating modern republic, they went into their libraries, pulled at works of philosophers, such as john locke and thomas hobbs. they consulted the greeks, the romans, the philosophers of europe and the bible. they revered the power of the written word, and how it enable ad nation, free from the whims of the king. as john adams wrote, a republic, quote, is a government of laws and not of men.

unquote. a government of laws is a government of reason and a government of books. that was true at our founding andru we must insure that it remains a hallmark of our future. [applause] >> i mean, come on! i am so glad i got you to read that paragraph because it gave me chillsbe to read it in the bk and underline it vigorously. but it is also, wonderful to be reminded of the men, in this case the men who set about the noble experiment of creating this country. not perfect. not a perfect exercise but they created a document and a nation that makes it possible for someone like me, and someone

like you, to sit across from each other and to have an open dialing log about who we are as a people. before i open it up to, i'm going to ask you one last question. then i'm going to open it up to questions from the audience. there are two standing microphones because the lights are in my eyes i'm assuming one is over here and one is over here. i ask that you make sure that your question is short and that it is indeed a question. [laughter]. because we want as many people to ask questions as possible. also no speeches. if you do launch into a speech, i don't mean to be rude i will cut you off and i will be rude doing it. [laughter]. so, the last question i want to askso you -- before we throw it over to the q&a, mrs. simmons, the principal of william g. love

elementary school, and you have this, at this moment that made me laugh. it is in the public education chapter on page 195. you write, sometimes to both break thee, ice and make a poin, she would explain, quote, you know, there is tough, there is street tough. there is street tough. heights tough, and then there is prison tough, end quote. after a pause, she would invariably add, in a voice i can still remember, quote, and trust me friends, i can be prison tough and beyond if i have to be, end quote. who was this lady? [laughter]. was one of the most important people of my life. certainly outside of the -- [inaudible] mrs. simmons was of a different era. remember i was in elementary school ins the 1930s.

this was public school. i never saw the inside of anything as a student other than public school, including the college i went to, tiny sam houston state teachers college but mrs. hicks was in the scheme of things at that time, she was allowed byim the school system o be a kind of dictator at the elementary school. was a benevolent dictator but she chose the teachers, she selected the teachers. she was a nuclear power plant of energy. she came into every classroom at left once every day, just to check in. and the, one might say she was micromanaging buth we didn't se it that way. i will give you specific example of why she was such a strong educator. that when you had your multiplication tables, when your teacher thoughtle you had masted

the multiplication tables, then you went one by one, alone to simmons office and you recited the multiplication tables. if it was not perfect you went back to study it again. another example was, mrs. simmons, many people in our neighborhood did not have ath telephone. i'm not talking about a cell phone. they had no telephone. remember, this is the depression. a long time ago. but she would send notes home to parents. and if you misbehaved in school, particularly they did very often, she would send a note home and expected parents to come to school. i recognize it has been a long time ago. i'm not suggesting that every principal at every school in our country could do as mrs. simmons did. i would say she had such a deep level of commitment to every student in the school, she is still to me a shining example of

what a school teacher and school administrator can be. >> and with that -- [applause] wow, dan, we have a lot of people. i'm going to alternate. so i'm going to -- wow. i will start with the guy in the tie. >> mr. rather when you began your television career at cbs news. there wereene only three sourcef television. weev evolved into a society whee news is presented into so many platforms and so many different flavors of news available and, when one one event happens it can be interpreted and presented in so many difficult ways. what do you make of that in terms of how we move forward in processing what the truth is and what newss means to different audiences? >> well, the technology has changed tremendously.

the number of platforms for news has multiplied tremendously. very hard to compare when i started at cbs news and today. what hasn't changed is the fundamental responsibility of the press. what is it that we journalists, that we're trying to do quality journalism and integrity. what is your role? the role is to try to be, insofar humanly possible as to get to the truth or close to the truth as humanly possible. to be witnesses, to bear witness, toas establish facts, we're not talking about alternative facts. facts. and to give us close to the truth as we can. that part of the of journalists hasn't changed with all the otherr changes that happened. when we're at our best,

acknowledging that we, i include myself are not always at our best, when we're at our best, that is the job. now, here as we move forward in the, in the post-digital age, it is more difficult for a news consumer today than it was during that time when i started at cbs news in 1962. it's a greater challenge for news consumers. it's a greater challenge to get a wide variety of news sources and compare them, not being in a silo and not hearing an echo what you already decided. i find with many people, this has been true over the years but now it is more dangerous, there are people who take the view, don't bother me with the facts, my mind is made up. in a society such as ours this is dangerous. so there iss, a lot of good reporting being done today. but you have to search a little

harder to find it. i will say having said that, that one of the problems for those of us in journalism and for journalists institutions, is this. that the old business model that supported the kind of reporting that we had in the 19 60s and '70s, that business model if not dead isis dying. nobody with very few exceptions has come up with a new business model that can advance, that can finance the kind of coverage that cbs news provided, for example, in the 1960s and others did. two examples. at a time when we need more, really high-quality international reporting, what we used to call foreign news, we're in fact gettingng less, becauset is one of the more expensive forms of journalism to have on the ground people whoho live in foreign countries.

so there has been a shrinkage of first class international reporting. the second example i would use, deep digging investigative reporting. it is among the most expensive forms of journalism and there was aex time when a place like cbs news financed a lot of it. not so much anymore. there are some, i'm happy to say there has been somewhat after revival of investigative reporting recently. but my point here is, with the old business model for not only newspapers but also in many ways electronic journalism, gone and nobody coming up with a new business model, american journalism is inwi what i would call a kind of interunum. it's a worth from the catholic church. the old order is gone, the new order is nots yet in place. now, this is affecting the quality of news that in general that you get, and something to consider. i have no ideaa what the busines

model will be going forward. my optism tells me we'll find one. consumers need to understand, the many of the problems are just what i just outlined. it's a shrinking of coverage as the resources available for coverage getav more and more limited as a general proposition. question.for the >> question here. >> my pleasure to talk to you. thank you for coming here. very happy to have you. i'm confident that journal -- journalists, that have grown up with you, if we're smart consumers in news we can find the truth in journalism but what do you say to, our leaders at the highest level, i would say like a pliable relationship with truth, okay? and h i'm worried about my kids.

i'm worried about our institutions, separation of powers, when we're seeking truth and it is not, we can not find it. there are lies, there are you know -- i'm confused and everything seems so irrational. so how do we reconcile this, our leaders who can not seem to speak the truth, facts? >> i thank you for the question. help me out here. i'm not hearing as well. >> i think she is asking, we have leaders who have, i think you used a pliable relationship with the truth. >> yes. >> and how does she, and how do other americans contend with that when they're looking and trying to understand what's happening but, they're very leaders, you can't trust that they're going to tell you the truth, is that right?

>> yes.os >> thanks. >> this isha a growing and ongog problem. what you, in general describe. because and, again, let's say straight out what the situation is. you have an administration many ways seeks to move to us a post-truth political era. a post-fact political era. and, given the power of the presidency, this is a powerful force to convince people, well, truth doesn't matter all that much.at and truth is fungible, facts are fungible. now, this places a heavy responsibility on the citizensry, on each individual citizen. again, i'm going to say i have tremendous confidence in the american people. my experience as a reporter is to haveea great confidence in te

audience. having said that, we americans have a lot of flaws. americans in general are good at separating brass tacks from bull shine, and while it's a confusing time, as i said before, it presents in some way as greater challenge for each individual citizen, i do not think this effort to convince the public, well, truth doesn't matter, it doesn't count. only thing that counts is what i, eye, your leader tells you, i don't i think it will get very far and i don't want to extrapolate too much, i think results of tuesday's elections was repudiation what we said earlier. that tone and style of the presidency is not playing well and will not play well over the long with most americans. thank you. [applause] >> yes here. >> hi, just let you know we have time for four more questions. i'm sorry. >> okay. >> four more questions.

one, two, three, four. >> thank you so much for being here, mr. rather. my question is kind of related to that. there is some discussions now, whether or not news organizations should cover the white house press briefing, covering it to make the leaders answer questions to the press but also with the alternative facts that there may be just a propaganda effort with that press briefing. i was wondering what your perspective on that would be. . .

because it is an opportunity for individual reporters and various institutions to ask the tough question and what is frequently ask the tough to follow-up question and forced president spokesman to make it clear that she in this case is not answering the question. but i. do think because these briefings are covered up live, it is important for you, the individual citizen to understand that with the modern presidency, and thisde didn't weaken with te donald trump but he has carried to an extreme before that the white house press briefing is designed by the white houseie to be a straight up propaganda operation.

it isop to tell the action histy hashe trump administration told. [laughter] but you know, there's so many good reportersrs these days andi think the public understands this, but they come prepared to ask theh tough questions, to ak the tough follow-up questions and they leave thed briefing rm and say to themselves okay, that is at stake in the trump administration says is going on. and let me and my organization find out what is really going on. that is a really important role of thehe press. one of my favorite depositions is news is that the public needs

to know that someone somewhere come usually a powerful person doesn't want the public to know. that is news. most of the rest is just advertising and propaganda. [laughter] >> mr. rather come i very much enjoyed following up this summer when you took your road trip with your grand plan. [laughter] i'm curious to know what lessons you took home after taking a road trip through america with a college kid. what lessons did you learn taking a road trip with your grandson, with a college kid. >> thank you for noticing. i took this trip frankly for sundays of bonding with my

oldest grandson. he had never seen mount rushmore and we drove from texas to mount rushmore and spent day after day driving through the heartland of the country. one of the things i learned was how interest did he was. and he tells me this is reflective of his friends as well. how interested he was inhabiting an historical of what happened today. some of the things they talked about before. very interested to know how the country is handled times of stress and division before and we talked some about the 1960s we talked some about mccarthyism. so he was that interested in historical perspective and more importantly he's a senior in college now. something discussed very often.

the other thing i learned is that try as martin did and try asas he does and as badly as i want to understand it, hip-hop music is still a challenge for me. [applause] the [laughter] >> you're not alone. >> as a high school teacher, i feel the teachers have so many responsibilities today. education as a whole get disparaged and we've all heard a lot about that. you have a deep relationship with education,ha sir. i want to hear more about your take on that. >> i'm glad you raised it.

there's old chap or an education in whatt unites us and the reasn the whole chat here if they do want to remind myself and how important a dedication to education has been in the development of the country and how important it is. i have a prejudice and i like to put my prejudice upfront. i have tremendous respect, great respect for private schools, religious schools. they are part of the very essence of the country. they are of great art of god is

the ranking superpower economically. as you ratemi me point out, various sources seek to undermine public schools. i try hard not to read people's motives, but i can make a judgment onn their actions and make you think is a personal opinion this is very dangerous for the country. such things as maintaining our position as world leaders in science and research science just for knowledge sake, not just for applied science is absolutely crucial to our future dominated by artificial intelligence of society. we cannot maintain that position

for leadership can not be seeking to improve our overall education system and particularly our public schools and i will say i've said several times tonight i think this has been dangerous and perilous time forof our country and one of the reasons it's a perilous time is because the public's mind in many cases gotten muddled about the value of public schools and i say once again it's not in any respect to schools, better public school system has been allowed to deteriorate over a long period of time and we have to stop if you will in that direction to where american public schools will stand. >> thank you.

[applause] >> with earlier earlier conversation i started to build up your grandson, i hear a lot of interest about what happens in the 1960s, one of the angst that happened and then on the millennial with minimal history. what does someone who's lived through all of this to say go forward, to cut the role of the craziness, what is the focus it's reasonable we can look at and what is an action we can do to move forward? >> the question about moving forward, what is the focus that inone else like her can zero on and now the an action. -- reasonable daily action they can do to help move things forward. >> keep in mind i'm going to try

to answer the question. keep in mind, what you're looking at -- [inaudible] [laughter] i'm a reporter whogh got lucky, who got very lucky. i am going to try to answer your question that it's very important perhaps now more than any other time in my lifetime, my own lifetime to ask that question yourself every day and would suggest, very respectfully suggest the first thing is how can i help someone else? one step that president kennedy in his memorable inaugural address when he was sworn in come ask not what your country can do for

you. ask what you can do for your country. theyyo remind that it can bringt down to the local level every day.go i'm not going to ask of my community can do for me, what may school, my city government. i'm going to ask what i can do for my neighbor. and i will add one thing particularly in today'shb environment. i want to help one other person today. if you can make that a person who is of different race than you, different religion than yourself, different ethnic background of yourself, and this i'm convinced will help you as a person, but it's a contribution to your country. the most powerful thing.

[applause] >> to go to get everybody else to vote is a major contribution and will be the rest of youre life. thank you. >> at dinner mr. rather as everyone said when they came out, better questioning during their leads perfectly to your book, you wrote on page 268. do not apologize or explain away your preacher tells them. do not sacrifice your ideals ultimately democracy iss an action more than a belief. the people's voice coming your

voice must be heard for it to happen. dan rather and alley accretion or commit thank you very much for what unites us. [applause] >> thank you. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

>> here's a look at the current best-selling books according to "the new york times." topping the list is best-selling biographer walter isakson three walter isakson to recount the of leonardo da vinci followed by former white house photographer pete suzette behind the scenes look at barack obama's presidency. president

trump. [applause] >> good morning. this is the last regular complication of the semester. right, david? they had to